Kickstarter Video Project Attracts Misogynist Horde

[JerrytheBullfrog]

Smurfette principle

Your wrong, Clearing the Eye definitely "gets it [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/7.378338.14792236]".

OP:Out of curiosity, has she covered the stereotypical ways men are depicted in video games and other forms of media? ...or is this just another person telling me how feminism is somehow concerned about men, yet they are reluctant to focus on it?

Why should she have to? She, as a woman, wants to make a video about the harmful stereotypes about women in videogames. She is under no obligations to make a video about the harmful stereotypes of A.) men, B.) ethnic minorities, C.) transgendered persons, D.) sexual minorities, E.) martians, G.) whatever.

Screaming WHAT ABOUT TEH MENZ does nobody any favors here. If you want a video about the harmful stereotypes that men face in games (and there are harmful stereotypes, which largely come from the same patriarchal sexist bullshit that many female stereotypes come from), then start a kickstarter to *make your own damn video series.*

 

[duchaked]

it's a topic that's gotten covered through and through over the years (here and there), but it's not a bad one to cover all things considered heh

but definitely not something I'd throw money at :$

 

[JerrytheBullfrog]

And I've already had this argument multiple times, I don't have time for it right now. I do have studies and sources for my claims, I just do not have the energy or the patience to look for them.

Why is it that in every feminism debate on this website the "I have evidence, I promise, I just don't have it with me" people are always on the anti-feminism side?

I've never seen someone source the 1 in 4 rape stat.

And I've never seen anyone source the stupid claim that rapists think all other men are also rapists, and rape jokes reinforce that.

Sources for the 1/4 claim listed here [http://www.oneinfourusa.org/statistics.php]. Rape jokes are bullshit anyway. OH NOES WE CANT MAKE LIGHT OF ONE OF THE WORST THINGS A PERSON CAN GO THROUGH BAWWWWW

Homework does not entail reading biased as fuck people who already agree with you.

He quite clearly already knows what the smurfette principle is, but he disagrees with you so you gotta call him a sexist.

Homework DOES entail reading stuff from people who know a hell of a lot more about the subject and have thought about it more than you ever will. Knowing *what* the Smurfette Principle is and knowing *why* it is wrong and *why* his usage of it as a defense there was fucked up are different things.

But please, by all means continue to be the rape apologist. It doesn't hurt anyone. Except the people who survive sexual violence. It hurts them whether you admit it or not.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

Why should she have to? She, as a woman, wants to make a video about the harmful stereotypes about women in videogames.

As I said before, I don't know a great deal about the women and so I am asking what kind of feminist she is. The two most common ones I have come across are feminist who believe feminism is for women's rights and feminist who believe that feminism represents gender rights. If she believes the former, then she is "under no obligation". However, if she subcribes to the later, then she should focus on how men are depicted as well.

Screaming WHAT ABOUT TEH MENZ does nobody any favors here. If you want a video about the harmful stereotypes that men face in games (and there are harmful stereotypes, which largely come from the same patriarchal sexist bullshit that many female stereotypes come from), then start a kickstarter to *make your own damn video series.*

As I just said, if she is the second type of feminist, then I see no reason why she can't expand her videos to be about gender subjects that also focus on men.

In terms of your silly comment "WHAT ABOUT TEH MENZ does nobody any favors here", I direct you to this comment [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/7.378338.14792998].

 

[Angryman101]

Even going by your barebones logic, women will simply return to their original state as housewives, which is another state of unhappiness as well(as the feminist movement informs this is ALSO an unhappy state). If anything unhappiness for women extends from the outdated stereotypes associated with the genders. Women in the coming years will be the primary earners of households, and are still expected to be the primary caregivers of children and house cleaners. In many ways they still retain many of the responsibilities they had before, but men haven't budged in their willingness to extend theirs.

Women in the coming years won't be getting married, and will have to live as single mothers if marriage trends continue. This is their own fault.
Housewives aren't in a state of unhappiness, feminism just promised something more that women thought would make them happier. It didn't.

It isn't necessary about happiness but the potential for happiness, for self and others.

(Unless you want to talk about "happiness" derived from achieving whatever change was the goal, and not necessarily the results. If we go down that rabbit hole the already dubious labels become farce; Are satisfaction or closure happiness, how long should one be happy because an event, how do we handle happiness brought about by making someone else happy?)

The potential for happiness means nothing if it doesn't lead to actual happiness. Feminism has accomplished its original goals: women have the vote, are economically independent, and the sexual revolution has made birth control easily available.
And yet, women are still more unhappy than they were. Feminism keeps on adding more and more goals and women keep on becoming less and less happy. Getting what you think you want will never make you happy.

So what, the first feminists were just douchebags out to trick gullible women? How far back do you blame them: voting? owning property?

Just how much protection do these simple, delicate women need from the ability to make choices?

Out of morbid curiosity: what about husbands? Are they just poor brainwashed saps who actually should be out eating raw meat and wrestling bears?

I think feminists are the same as everyone else. They are pursuing things that they think will make them happier and have a better quality life. The problem is, they're deluded, and the ideology has been twisted nefariously. Feminism is now about demonizing men and victimizing women, giving them an attitude of entitlement.
'I deserve a job for my Women's Studies degree! Why is it not there? GOVERNMENT, DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS.'
Previously it was merely about giving some equal footing, which was cool despite the delusion, but the way it is now it is only detrimental to society and women as a whole.
As to your questions:
1. It's well known that increased number of choices lead to unhappiness.
2. Husbands do what they do to secure steady sex and progeny. Men sacrifice their freedom to wander just as much as women sacrifice their freedom to work in a traditional relationship. What people don't seem to realize is that men sacrifice just as much or more when subscribing to gender roles. Workplace competition is leaps and bounds more intense for men than it is for women.

Okay, then I have some bad news for you. You don't get it. You might think you get it, but you don't. You don't get the Smurfette Principle, and you don't get how to say things that are not sexist. You single out the "gentlemen" posting those vile comments, but you're on their team. They're in the field playing the game; you're the one squirting water into their mouths when they take a break.

If you want to get it; if you want to be a decent person who doesn't say incredibly sexist things like the incredibly sexist stuff you just said in the post I quoted earlier, then I suggest you put a little more effort into researching and understanding the feminist perspective, *from* their perspective. There are innumerable blogs and vlogs and magazines and such to choose from. I can recommend a few; Shakesville and Tiger Beatdown are both very good. Sady Doyle is a delight, and you can follow her on tumblr and twitter and such (she also contributes to Tiger Beatdown).

Enrich yourself.

Hahaha, why the fuck would anyone give a shit about conforming to your standards of a decent person? There was nothing sexist about what he said. Your delusions do not replace reality no matter how fiercely you cling to them.

You know.. i fear that i can't continue this conversation without sounding like a mad scientist. Oh well here we go.

Happiness is nothing but a chemical released in our brain that triggers when we do something that evolution decided was good for us. As humanity learns more and more about our brain we will eventually figure out how it works and get used to its functions. From then on it shouldn't be too difficult to move a few neurons here and there and change when the dopamine gets released. The brain is nothing more than a complicated computer and we just need to figure out the code.

So for example, we would be able to take the part of our mind that gives us dopamine whenever we shoot down someone else's argument without listening (useful back then when we lived in caves to unite a group easily, not so much now), and switch it around so it gets released when we listen and weight both sides carefully.

Yeah the technology is far off but we'll get there as long as we don't destroy ourselves. We can never take away biology, but that doesn't mean we have to stick with what evolution gave us.

Actually, when I say happiness I mean a general contentedness that originates from a life where the net positive outweighs the net negative. This comes from leading a life that minimizes pain and maximizes happiness, the dopamine reaction you talked about. Leading this kind of life doesn't require any crazy technology, pal, just a mindset and the appropriate resources.

 

[Angryman101]

And I've already had this argument multiple times, I don't have time for it right now. I do have studies and sources for my claims, I just do not have the energy or the patience to look for them.

Why is it that in every feminism debate on this website the "I have evidence, I promise, I just don't have it with me" people are always on the anti-feminism side?

I've never seen someone source the 1 in 4 rape stat.

And I've never seen anyone source the stupid claim that rapists think all other men are also rapists, and rape jokes reinforce that.

Sources for the 1/4 claim listed here [http://www.oneinfourusa.org/statistics.php]. Rape jokes are bullshit anyway. OH NOES WE CANT MAKE LIGHT OF ONE OF THE WORST THINGS A PERSON CAN GO THROUGH BAWWWWW

Homework does not entail reading biased as fuck people who already agree with you.

He quite clearly already knows what the smurfette principle is, but he disagrees with you so you gotta call him a sexist.

Homework DOES entail reading stuff from people who know a hell of a lot more about the subject and have thought about it more than you ever will. Knowing *what* the Smurfette Principle is and knowing *why* it is wrong and *why* his usage of it as a defense there was fucked up are different things.

But please, by all means continue to be the rape apologist. It doesn't hurt anyone. Except the people who survive sexual violence. It hurts them whether you admit it or not.

Hi there. I am a 'survivor' of one of these examples of what legally constitutes rape. While in college, I became blackout drunk, and a sober woman took me back to my room, where we proceeded to have sexual intercourse.
His words don't hurt me, and neither did the incident. When I woke up next to her the next morning, I shrugged and went to make some coffee.
What does this prove? That the legal parameters of rape extend to women who regret the choices they made, who then proceed to rationalize them and report rape, which skews actual statistics.
You probably won't believe me though, so I don't know why I bothered typing this.

 

[JerrytheBullfrog]

Why should she have to? She, as a woman, wants to make a video about the harmful stereotypes about women in videogames.

As I said before, I don't know a great deal about the women and so I am asking what kind of feminist she is. The two most common ones I have come across are feminist who believe feminism is for women's rights and feminist who believe that feminism represents gender rights. If she believes the former, then she is "under no obligation". However, if she subcribes to the later, then she should focus on how men are depicted as well.

Screaming WHAT ABOUT TEH MENZ does nobody any favors here. If you want a video about the harmful stereotypes that men face in games (and there are harmful stereotypes, which largely come from the same patriarchal sexist bullshit that many female stereotypes come from), then start a kickstarter to *make your own damn video series.*

As I just said, if she is the second type of feminist, then I see no reason why she can't expand her videos to be about gender subjects that also focus on men.

In terms of your silly comment "WHAT ABOUT TEH MENZ does nobody any favors here", I direct you to this comment [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/7.378338.14792998].

Broseph, the entirety of the modern world is about the rights that men have. We are pretty well fucking represented. That is why there is a Women's/Gender Studies department at colleges and not a Men's Studies, because in general *every department* is a Men's Studies department.

Feminism is a force for the equality of women, so in that case it is concerned with women's rights. HOWEVER, it also recognizes that sexism and the patriarchy hurt men as well ("boys don't cry," assuming all men are emotionally dead, bloodthirsty brutes, etc). The two are not mutually exclusive.

HOWEVER, demanding that someone who clearly intends to just do a video *analyzing female characters* also analyze male characters is not the solution. She can absolutely agree that there are harmful male stereotypes (because there are) without wanting to spend her own time and money making a video about them. That's not the point of her project.

That's what I mean when I say that screaming WHAT ABOUT TEH MENZ does nobody any favors, because it doesn't. Are there harmful male stereotypes? Yes. Is she obligated to do a video on them, even if she recognizes them as valid? No.

Make your own damn video if you want it to exist so badly.

 

[JerrytheBullfrog]

And I've already had this argument multiple times, I don't have time for it right now. I do have studies and sources for my claims, I just do not have the energy or the patience to look for them.

Why is it that in every feminism debate on this website the "I have evidence, I promise, I just don't have it with me" people are always on the anti-feminism side?

I've never seen someone source the 1 in 4 rape stat.

And I've never seen anyone source the stupid claim that rapists think all other men are also rapists, and rape jokes reinforce that.

Sources for the 1/4 claim listed here [http://www.oneinfourusa.org/statistics.php]. Rape jokes are bullshit anyway. OH NOES WE CANT MAKE LIGHT OF ONE OF THE WORST THINGS A PERSON CAN GO THROUGH BAWWWWW

Homework does not entail reading biased as fuck people who already agree with you.

He quite clearly already knows what the smurfette principle is, but he disagrees with you so you gotta call him a sexist.

Homework DOES entail reading stuff from people who know a hell of a lot more about the subject and have thought about it more than you ever will. Knowing *what* the Smurfette Principle is and knowing *why* it is wrong and *why* his usage of it as a defense there was fucked up are different things.

But please, by all means continue to be the rape apologist. It doesn't hurt anyone. Except the people who survive sexual violence. It hurts them whether you admit it or not.

Hi there. I am a 'survivor' of one of these examples of what legally constitutes rape. While in college, I became blackout drunk, and a sober woman took me back to my room, where we proceeded to have sexual intercourse.
His words don't hurt me, and neither did the incident. When I woke up next to her the next morning, I shrugged and went to make some coffee.
What does this prove? That the legal parameters of rape extend to women who regret the choices they made, who then proceed to rationalize them and report rape, which skews actual statistics.
You probably won't believe me though, so I don't know why I bothered typing this.

And because you, as a man - who has institutionalized power, who is congratulated and considered more "manly" for having sex with more women, whose body is not regulated by the state if something goes wrong, who does not face societal pressure and think about rape almost every time you go out - aren't bothered by it happening to you, CLEARLY nobody should ever feel violated by having their inhibitions worn down by mind altering drugs.

No, never. Your one case invalidates all the others, and anyone who feels violated and raped is just WRONG. Well done, sir, you have completely proven me wrong.

Or, on the other hand, as long as we're doing anecdotal evidence, I could tell you about the close friend of mine who went over to a friend's house, he kept giving her drinks until well after she was too inebriated to say no (to the drinks or anything else), and "seduced" her. Upon waking up she took an hour long shower because she felt violated and used and dirty, and yet never reported it as rape (though it was) because she didn't want to get her friend in trouble.

ONE ANECDOTE IS EVERYTHING. HALLELUJAH.

 

[JerrytheBullfrog]

Links that everyone here should read: Nerds and male privilege [http://www.doctornerdlove.com/2011/11/nerds-and-male-privilege/], and

MOST IMPORTANTLY

NO SERIOUSLY THIS IS SUPER RELEVANT

Rape Culture in gaming [http://fozmeadows.wordpress.com/2012/06/11/rape-culture-in-gaming/]. It's non-judgmental, it's a calm explanation of All Of This Shit.

 

[Angryman101]

And because you, as a man - who has institutionalized power, who is congratulated and considered more "manly" for having sex with more women, whose body is not regulated by the state if something goes wrong, who does not face societal pressure and think about rape almost every time you go out - aren't bothered by it happening to you, CLEARLY nobody should ever feel violated by having their inhibitions worn down by mind altering drugs.

No, never. Your one case invalidates all the others, and anyone who feels violated and raped is just WRONG. Well done, sir, you have completely proven me wrong.

Or, on the other hand, as long as we're doing anecdotal evidence, I could tell you about the close friend of mine who went over to a friend's house, he kept giving her drinks until well after she was too inebriated to say no (to the drinks or anything else), and "seduced" her. Upon waking up she took an hour long shower because she felt violated and used and dirty, and yet never reported it as rape (though it was) because she didn't want to get her friend in trouble.

ONE ANECDOTE IS EVERYTHING. HALLELUJAH.

Ah man yeah you fuckin got me bro whenever I'm out I'm all about the gratuitous rapage, lmao.
I CHOSE to drink. Women CHOOSE to drink. Your friend CHOSE TO TAKE THOSE DRINKS. While I wouldn't do that to a woman (I obviously get sex by being raped rofl), the blame rests on your friend's shoulders just as much as her friend's for taking those drinks. If I-or she-'d been slipped a fucking roofie then I'd probably be more upset or be blameless, but MY CHOICES led to that result. I dislike you intensely for being a false rape apologist.
You were generalizing, I proved you wrong. As a rape survivor, I'm super hurt by your accusations. How dare you! You're triggering me! Hahahaha.
I also enjoy how you're subconsciously inserting a bunch of 'sexist' thoughts into your diatribe. So women are to be protected and coddled, eh? So women aren't responsible for their choices, huh? Man, that must be nice. And just because I'm a man means I'm an evil rapist? You probably think that in my drunken, incoherent state I somehow took advantage of her!
Also- body regulated by the state? What does that even mean?
The only people who think manliness is determined by the number of women you've bedded are women, frat boys, and emasculated supplicating manboobs.

 

[JerrytheBullfrog]

And because you, as a man - who has institutionalized power, who is congratulated and considered more "manly" for having sex with more women, whose body is not regulated by the state if something goes wrong, who does not face societal pressure and think about rape almost every time you go out - aren't bothered by it happening to you, CLEARLY nobody should ever feel violated by having their inhibitions worn down by mind altering drugs.

No, never. Your one case invalidates all the others, and anyone who feels violated and raped is just WRONG. Well done, sir, you have completely proven me wrong.

Or, on the other hand, as long as we're doing anecdotal evidence, I could tell you about the close friend of mine who went over to a friend's house, he kept giving her drinks until well after she was too inebriated to say no (to the drinks or anything else), and "seduced" her. Upon waking up she took an hour long shower because she felt violated and used and dirty, and yet never reported it as rape (though it was) because she didn't want to get her friend in trouble.

ONE ANECDOTE IS EVERYTHING. HALLELUJAH.

Ah man yeah you fuckin got me bro whenever I'm out I'm all about the gratuitous rapage, lmao.
I CHOSE to drink. Women CHOOSE to drink. Your friend CHOSE TO TAKE THOSE DRINKS. While I wouldn't do that to a woman (I obviously get sex by being raped rofl), the blame rests on your friend's shoulders just as much as her friend's for taking those drinks. If I-or she-'d been slipped a fucking roofie then I'd probably be more upset or be blameless, but MY CHOICES led to that result. I dislike you intensely for being a false rape apologist.
You were generalizing, I proved you wrong. As a rape survivor, I'm super hurt by your accusations. How dare you! You're triggering me! Hahahaha.
I also enjoy how you're subconsciously inserting a bunch of 'sexist' thoughts into your diatribe. So women are to be protected and coddled, eh? So women aren't responsible for their choices, huh? Man, that must be nice. And just because I'm a man means I'm an evil rapist? You probably think that in my drunken, incoherent state I somehow took advantage of her!
Also- body regulated by the state? What does that even mean?
The only people who think manliness is determined by the number of women you've bedded are women, frat boys, and emasculated supplicating manboobs.

Aaaaand victim blaming. We're done here. Have fun being a rape apologist

 

[Angryman101]

Aaaaand victim blaming. We're done here. Have fun being a rape apologist

I am a victim, and I do blame myself. Way to go, haha!

 

[dantoddd]

It seems like a good idea. I was going to give her some money, probably a dollar, but realized that she has way more than what she needs. I few concerns though. Firstly, is she really qualified to do this sort of stuff especially given the state of those controllers. Secondly, why on earth does this cost so much.

 

[OtherSideofSky]

Speaking of which, has anyone ever written about the stereotypes male characters get forced into?

If you actually care so much. why don't you do it? Otherwise hearing people always complain about people not making such things for men comes off as a hollow complaint, as false concern that's just used to attack and not for any constructive purposes that real concern would be.

Here: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.378512-The-Portrayal-of-Men-and-Masculinity-in-Video-Games#14800338
I made a separate thread to talk about it. I will try to add more serious commentary of my own later this evening when I have some time. I already explained elsewhere in this thread why I mentioned the subject here and why I had not done anything about it until now.

Honestly, I'm surprised that so many people are quoting that comment. When I wrote it, I expected that it would either be ignored or that some helpful person would give me a link to someone who had written about it already. I don't really feel confident in my own ability to tackle these issues and would honestly prefer to hear what more qualified people have to say, but I will give it a try.

I was really expecting that, if anyone did quote or respond to my initial comment, it would be in response to the "dudes with boobs" question. That criticism has honestly only ever struck me as a hateful and sexist way of de-gendering female characters who are defined by characteristics or roles traditionally coded as male or who fail to display sufficiently "feminine" qualities. However, I am, as I said, not an expert and would like to hear what other people think about this and why they categorize certain characters in that way.

Having now looked through all of the Feminist Frequency site, I am looking forward to seeing the planned video series (and to seeing what she could possibly do that will cost that much money). I think that her analysis sometimes falls apart when she strays to far from concrete examples, but her points are generally sound. One thing which did strike me as worrying was a section of her piece on file sharing culture, in which she says:

All of these ads are just using women's bodies to appeal to geeks and gamers. People that look like this [cut to an image of the cast of The Big Bang Theory].

This is blatant stereotyping of physical appearance as well as a put down and dismissal of a group of people based solely that on physical appearance. Isn't this a decidedly unfeminist thing to say, especially going by the definitions she establishes in her other pieces?

 

[Awexsome]

I think this sums it up:

We like to think we don't fall prey to racism or sexism and are quick to slam anything that indicates otherwise as exaggeration or trouble-making.

But, ignoring the trolling, why was there rage for her *asking for money* to fund her project? She's not applying for a government grant, or taking money from something more important. If she was asking for money to try growing chocolate lemons, would there be a fraction as much bile?

Nope. The rage stems from the raw nerve which is the topic of her study and *that* says a lot about the rager.

 

[Phisi]

I will not support this and now I would like to do an analysis of her kickstarter promotional video before going further into my reasons.

She is promoting the disposability of males in the world by creating a video only concerning the portrayal of women in gaming when men are portrayed badly such as it being their role to give their lives to defend women etc much more often. The fact that she ignores this and instead, promotes how once again society (including males) should fund her to help females in their portrayal in video games just reinforces this.

I realise that most feminists are in support of male rights but still many are not (example lady: http://thefemitheist.blogspot.com.au/ ). While I do support equal rights I have concerns that such a video would do nothing to help the other side but instead worsen the problem and also make it harder for devs to make games. I don't think games are inherently sexist in how they portray roles though, most of us that play them don't take them as literal interpretations of society and they are not intended to be. Instead they are the opposites, the fringes of society are represented as gaming is all about fantasy, worlds and lives we will never experience. Games are just media at the end and media doesn't have an opinion, instead it is the people exploring it that form opinions from what it presents as this is what they are designed to do, how else could they make you form emotional bonds to characters? Now imagine if every time a dev wanted to add something to a game they had to consider whether this is a fair portrayal or not, what if they wanted to make a satirical piece on the Catholic church? You mean the Catholic church doesn't have ceremonies where the boil ducks alive and do gymnastics? Well I guess I can't make this game then. You have to allow for developers to portray what they want to portray how they want to portray and if you don't like it then don't buy the game. I acknowledge that I have kinda destroyed my original argument against her video (that is doesn't help combat sexism in gaming on both ends of the stick and only removes it from one side just to leave it topple over to the other) but that is made on the assumption that all the content in games have an affect on those who play them, the same assumption that she has made in assuming that the portrayal of women in games encourages misogynist practices. As for reinforcing them? Well then they must already have these ideas in their heads to draw from the media and changing media won't necessarily change the ideas that they get reinforcement from it. It is part of a far wider problem of sexism in society. also the actual cause for my first argument against her and something I would happily support I know the position she was taking on instead of just 'Femininist' Which as I've shown could also mean she is making a video about how all men should be murdered.

These are the reasons for me not supporting this. To summarise, I would support a video on gender roles in society and how this affects the games but I don't think it goes the other way round and would not support a video on it, especially one I think would cause harm. Now I have to go do maths and I haven't proof read this so I apologies in advance if something does not make sense/out of place.

 

[Condiments]

Even going by your barebones logic, women will simply return to their original state as housewives, which is another state of unhappiness as well(as the feminist movement informs this is ALSO an unhappy state). If anything unhappiness for women extends from the outdated stereotypes associated with the genders. Women in the coming years will be the primary earners of households, and are still expected to be the primary caregivers of children and house cleaners. In many ways they still retain many of the responsibilities they had before, but men haven't budged in their willingness to extend theirs.

Women in the coming years won't be getting married, and will have to live as single mothers if marriage trends continue. This is their own fault.
Housewives aren't in a state of unhappiness, feminism just promised something more that women thought would make them happier. It didn't.

According to your previously stated logic, we are all driven by our need for happiness. Since happiness is a subjective term, as you stated, we ourselves as men are not qualified to determine the path to happiness for women, as they can determine themselves. Just as a farmer seeks additional technology to make farming "suck less", women sought through their discontent with their current state of affairs(housewife) to remedy their unhappiness with "feminism". As we are all driven by happiness, and are the ultimate judges of own, it should be a self-regulating force. Women should have naturally deviated from feminism upon the realization that happiness was not gained from what feminism proposes. Under this logic and your "study"(women are unhappy with their lives), women and their job numbers should be on their decline rather than increasing. This is certainly not the case, as their job numbers continue to increase to the point where they're surpassing men both in overall job numbers and college degrees. Maybe the answer isn't as simple as feminism is "wrong" and should be "destroyed". What basis do we have for it? A few statistics you're having difficulty extrapolating meaning from?

You seem to have very limited views on subjects based off a few selective statistics.